Howard W. French
As the 17th-century poet John Donne wrote in those immortal lines, “No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main.”
Don’t be alarmed. This is not a column about poetry, or metaphysics, but about how the world economy has churned and woven its way, however unsteadily, toward closer and closer ties between different countries and regions, and thus toward greater integration overall. These processes are generally called globalization, lending to a sense that this is something relatively new, but in fact, it has been going on in one form or another for centuries.
This is also a column conceived as a sort of letter, one that is virtually addressed to Americans who are favorably inclined toward the foreign policy of President Donald Trump, especially regarding matters of trade and immigration. I’m not talking here about the most fervent members of his base, but rather, to those who are willing to reflect more on the question of what is meant practically by the slogan “Keep America Great,” and how one might infuse it with more positive meaning.
This is all based on a premise that the United States gains tremendously from the panoply of strong diplomatic and economic relationships it has played a leading role in building since World War II. Yes, this is a fairly obvious claim, but it bears repeating, especially after a week in which Trump has repeatedly called into question America’s alliance with Japan, one of its steadiest and most productive partnerships in the postwar era, and rolled over in the face of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s assessment that liberalism is “obsolete.” These were merely the latest signals in what constitutes with increasing obviousness a trend toward going it alone in Washington. Europe, America’s other foundational partner in prosperity and shared values, has been a punching bag for Trump almost since the start of his presidency. And so, once again, there he was last week, just before the start of the G-20 leaders’ summit in Osaka, implausibly claiming that, “European nations were set up to take advantage of the United States.”
Trump would rather countries be islands, even though it’s clear that no country can be an island and thrive in today’s world. Trump’s “America First” agenda wants to press pause on broader trends of global and regional integration, regardless of what it would mean for America’s position within its own continent. In a world of increasingly long and intricate supply and value chains, close U.S. integration with Canada, and especially with Mexico, will be key to sustaining American competitiveness—especially in securing a strong share of most valuable and technologically advanced parts of the manufacturing sector. Think not only automobiles, whose manufacturing processes already includes several trips back and forth across the border during assembly, but also things like aviation and high-tech medical equipment.
There are two kinds of arguments for this kind of economic integration, one purely self-interested, and the other more virtuous. The United States is almost inevitably going to lose more of its share of global manufacturing as other countries enter the fray of advanced industrialization in the wake of China’s transformational rise over the past 40 years. Seeing manufacturing deepen in one’s own neighborhood pays more immediate dividends than seeing it flee to more distant parts of the world, as trade statistics readily show.
Trump wants to press pause on broader trends of global and regional integration, regardless of what it would mean for America’s position within its own continent.“Every dollar that China exports to the U.S. has 7 cents worth of U.S. components,” Jorge Guajardo, a former Mexican ambassador to China, told me. “Every dollar Mexico exports to the U.S. has 42 cents of U.S. components, and that’s where you see the importance of supply chains.”
“U.S. companies are producing in Mexico so that their operations can remain competitive in places like Michigan,” Guajardo added. “That’s why it is important to have integration. Otherwise, China is going to keep beating the United States in manufacturing. You will be good in other things, but not in manufacturing.”
This is not merely a Mexican perspective, either. “There is an assumption [in American politics] that there is a one size pie and you only get one slice of it,” Shannon K. O’Neil, a senior fellow and Latin America expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, said in an interview. “In fact, the pie can get bigger, and so the question becomes how do you work with other people to make sure you can both get more pie. China’s pie is getting bigger, and that is how they are growing.” By this, she meant that China is becoming a force for globalization by extending its value chains and trade and investment relationships throughout its own neighborhood, as well as much further afield. “If you want to grow your pie you need allies, and you shouldn’t be ignoring or snubbing them.”
But when it comes to its own continent, and especially to Mexico, the Trump administration cannot bring itself to appraise that relationship at its true value because it has placed anti-immigrant rhetoric at the center of its policies. That choice is every bit as misguided as the fundamental mistakes being made in Trump’s economic stewardship, but for different reasons. His anti-immigrant stance, encapsulated in claims like “our country is full,” is driven by short-term political calculations—pandering to an electorate that fears social, racial and economic change. Such xenophobia, however, obscures the long-term demographic interests of the United States, which are bound up in labor and fiscal demands. There is a pressing economic need for immigrants in America now, and relative openness to immigration represents a strong competitive economic advantage to the United States going forward, whether compared to China or Europe, as I have argued in detail previously.
Self-interest and virtue come together in the question of Latin American immigration to the United States, though. Expanding economic well-being and development in Mexico and in other countries further south are probably the only ways of keeping immigration within manageable proportions—and thus keeping anti-immigrant backlash at bay. Prosperous countries also make better markets for the United States—ones best suited for the high-value supply chains of the industries of the future.
“Presumably one always wants to have a neighbor who is well-off, whose house is well-kept, and whose windows aren’t broken,” said Guajardo. “But under America First, these arguments tend to get lost.”
No comments:
Post a Comment